Sunday, April 5, 2009

If Avigdor Lieberman's first speech as Israel's new foreign minister did nothing else, it certainly vexed the media.

The Associated Press called it a "scathing critique of Mideast peace efforts" that had diplomats "cringing," while other reports said Lieberman had "dropped a political bombshell," "sparked an uproar," "repudiated a key accord," and "reinforced fears." The New York Times pronounced Lieberman's remarks "blunt and belligerent," describing the foreign minister as a "hawkish nationalist" who is "not known for diplomacy" and heads an "ultranationalist" party that is "seen by many as racist." Headlines summed up Lieberman's debut as an attack on peacemaking: "Lieberman dashes peace hopes," "Israeli official hits peace efforts," "Lieberman dumps peace deal."

But the headlines were wrong, as anyone can ascertain by reading Lieberman's short address. Far from disparaging peace, Israel's new foreign minister called for pursuing it with the respect and realism it deserves. And far from "dumping" agreements entered into by his predecessors, he explicitly committed himself to upholding the Roadmap - a step-by-step blueprint to a "two-state solution" adopted by Israel, the Palestinian Authority, and the international Quartet in 2003.

"I voted against the Roadmap," Lieberman acknowledged, but it was "approved by the Cabinet and by the Security Council" and is therefore "a binding resolution." However, he insisted, it must be implemented "in full." The Roadmap imposes specific obligations that the Palestinians must meet prior to achieving statehood - above all, an unequivocal end to violence, terrorism, and incitement against the Jewish state - and Israel will not agree to waive them in order to negotiate a final settlement.

If Lieberman is as good as his word - and if he is backed up by Benjamin Netanyahu, the new prime minister - we may finally see an end to Israel's fruitless attempts to buy peace with ever-more-desperate concessions and retreats. Under Ariel Sharon and Ehud Olmert, Israel surrendered the entire Gaza Strip, released hundreds of arrested terrorists, and even offered to divide Jerusalem with the Palestinian Authority. "But none of these far-reaching measures have brought peace," said Lieberman. "To the contrary." The steeper the price Israel has been willing to pay for peace, the more it has been repaid with violence: suicide bombings, rocket attacks, kidnapped and murdered soldiers, and wars with Hamas in Gaza and Hezbollah in Lebanon.

It is time, Lieberman is saying, for Israel to stop genuflecting to a feckless and counterproductive "peace process" and to return instead to the pre-Oslo policy of deterrence. "The fact that we say the word 'peace' 20 times a day will not bring peace any closer," he noted. It only makes Israel seem weak and irresolute, encouraging its enemies not to halt their murderous jihad, but to redouble it. Sixteen years of appeasement have left Israel more demonized and isolated than ever, the foreign minister observed. And when was Israel most admired in the world? "After the victory of the Six Day War," when no one doubted the Jewish state's audacity or resolve.

"If you want peace, prepare for war," Lieberman declared.

That idea may offend the smart set and leave diplomats "cringing," but Israel's new foreign minister is hardly the first to express it. "To be prepared for war is one of the most effectual means of preserving peace," affirmed President George Washington in his first address to Congress in 1790.

Perhaps the world would more clearly understand the nature of Israel's enemy if the media weren't forever fanning moral outrage at the Mideast's only bulwark of freedom and democracy.

In recent weeks, the Palestinian Authority has warned Arabs that it is "high treason" punishable by death to sell homes or property to Jews in Jerusalem; shut down a Palestinian youth orchestra and arrested its founder because the ensemble played for a group of elderly Holocaust survivors; and celebrated the deadliest terrorist attack in Israel's history with a TV special extolling the massacre. On Thursday, after a Palestinian terrorist used an axe to murder a 13-year-old Jewish boy, the al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades - a wing of the "moderate" Fatah party - issued a statement claiming responsibility.

There is no appeasing such hatred, and demonizing those who say so will not change that fact. "If you want peace, prepare for war." How refreshing to hear an Israeli foreign minister say so.

Mr Bagel: Instead of never ending one sided concessions with no progress, now the agreed terms of the agreement have to be abided by. This is how it should have been in the first place.To read the full article go to this link:Boston.com: Finally, harsh realism from Israel

Saturday, April 4, 2009

New Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said Iran is a `grave danger.'

JERUSALEM -- Ten years after being ousted as prime minister, conservative Benjamin Netanyahu returned to power Tuesday as the head of a hawkish coalition government that will be a pivotal player in President Barack Obama's push to stabilize the Middle East.

Netanyahu, 59, faces an immediate challenge in assuaging skeptical world leaders who worry that the new prime minister's combative style will undermine America's diplomatic efforts and fuel another spiral of violence in the Middle East.

In an unusually blunt interview with The Atlantic magazine, Netanyahu charged that Iran was a ''messianic apocalyptic cult'' with nuclear ambitions and a ''grave danger'' to the world.

European leaders have been especially critical of Israel because of its recent 22-day military offensive, which ravaged the Hamas-led Gaza Strip and prompted a brewing feud over the threatened demolition of some Palestinian homes in East Jerusalem.

''We are not happy with some of the steps of the Israeli government, namely construction works close to Jerusalem, but also access to Gaza, which is today very limited,'' Czech Foreign Minister Karel Schwarzenberg, whose country holds the presidency of the European Union, told the country's newspaper Lidove Noviny in Tuesday's edition.

Mr Bagel: Nice of Czech Foreign Minister Karel Schwarzenberg to deem it is any of his business what gets built in Israel. Then again Schwarzenberg, whose country holds the rotating presidency of the European Union, said, "The EU remains committed to the Durban Review Conference" and is ready to fully participate."

Some of her comments, according to Samuel Sokol in the Jerusalem Post:

The very concept of a Jewish state is "inherently racist." Israel must be turned into a "state of all its citizens," eliminating its Jewish or Zionist nature.

Iran's role in Palestinian affairs is "more useful" than that of regimes like Jordan and Egypt, in that Iran stands more firmly "against occupation than a lot of the Arab countries." Egypt and Jordan, indeed, are scared of a free and democratic Palestinian state.

It's not a good idea for Israel to be the region's sole nuclear power. "It would be more supporting me to have a [nuclear] counter-power to Israel. I need something to balance [its] power."

Is she worrying about Tehran getting close to acquiring a nuclear weapon? "No, I am not." To the contrary, said is "more afraid from the Israeli nuclear [weapons]."

Would the Israel Defense Forces use nuclear weapons? "The Israelis? I think yes. And I am afraid from real risk rather than from potential risk." More broadly, whereas the Iranian bomb is only "a potential" threat, the IDF is an actual danger. "Every day the Israeli [army] uses its violence, army violence."

Israel is an aggressor state, so only something along the lines of Mutually Assured Destruction would restrain it.

Would an Iranian bomb make Washington nervous, lead to more U.S. pressure on Israel, and that would be good thing? "Exactly."

Wednesday, April 1, 2009

Much is being made about Richard Holbrooke shaking the hand of the deputy foreign minister of Iran.Joe Klein's article writing for 'Swampland' blog: 'Meeting the Iranians' on the Time website certainly has.

"The handshake is a big deal. In 2000, Madeleine Albright had choreographed a casual handshake between Bill Clinton and Iranian president Khatami at the United Nations--and Khatami pulled out, under orders, one presumes, at the last minute. It was only a deputy foreign minister this time, but he showed."

The unfortunate thing is the handshake and what Joe Klein has made of it is more revealing of Klein's changing 'colors' and his penchant for exaggeration than offering any real substantive diplomatic sign.

Observing the Iranians strategy of late, its easy to see this as simply a continuation of Iran's attempt at drawing out and extending the timetable of diplomatic wrangling over their 'rumoured' nuclear agenda.

Jonathon Tobin from Contentions blog part of the commentarymagazine.com stable is a lot more sceptical of the real gains to be made with friendly gestures towards 'the mullahs'he writes:

"Communication with Iran about the conflict in Afghanistan, as well as the fate of two Americans who are currently missing in Iran, is understandable. What appears to be missing from the administration’s agenda with Iran is conveying to Tehran just how seriously Washington takes their ongoing push for nuclear weapons. There are a lot of things on Obama’s plate right now including economic disaster and wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. But as much as he seems to want to pretend Iranian nukes are not a pressing problem, they are now potentially even more dangerous and destabilizing."

If the Israeli intelligence timetable is to be believed rather than the US timetable then days, weeks, months could count in Iran's on going march towards nuclear weaponry.

I actually believe that the Iranians are running ahead of what even the Israeli's intelligence services will publicly acknowledge.

Strategically Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's announcement the previous year of having 3,000 cascades online must indicate just how serious the Iranians are in regards to enrichment of nuclear fuel, how much enrichment of uranium they have actually achieved is the real question, how much of their enrichment processes are 'transparent' and how much of it is clandestine. Iran has a history of lying about is nuclear progress.

The US is stuck between a very hard place, trying to keep the Russians on side, maintaining diplomatic gestures towards Iran in an attempt to shore up their need for a more compliant Iran in regards to Iraq, and even more importantly to neutralise their influence in Afghanistan at this critical juncture.

The sad fact is Obama thinks his diplomatic overtures towards Iran are helping match the US's 'global agenda', the real truth is Iran is quickly finding just how easily they can adopt their adroit 'puppet mastery' skills towards the US's foreign policy.

Seems the Russians might just be taking advantage of Obama's new diplomacy learning curve as well, Obama is slated to meet the Russians with regards nuclear disarmament and proliferation.

Tuesday, March 31, 2009

WASHINGTON (JTA) -- A group of seven leading House Democrats called on President Obama to take "urgent action" to stop Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon.

In a letter to the president, members of the U.S. Congress including the majority leader of the House of Representatives and chairmen of some of its top committees backed Obama's effort to engage Iran but stressed that it "cannot be open-ended" and that talks must begin "as soon as possible."

"We cannot allow Iran to use diplomatic discussions as a cover for continuing to work on its nuclear program," said the letter, dated March 26. "Iran must verifiably suspend its uranium enrichment program within at most a few months of the initiation of discussions."

The missive suggests examples of sanctions that could be used if talks fail, including on the Central Bank of Iran and energy companies investing in Iran's oil and gas sector, as well as measures that U.S. allies could take against the Iranian regime.

The signatories includes Majority Leader Steny Hoyer of Maryland; California Reps. Howard Berman and Henry Waxman, the Foreign Affairs Committee and Energy and Commerce Committee chairmen, respectively; Texas Rep. Silvestre Reyes, the Intelligence Committee chairman; Missouri Rep. Ike Skelton, the Armed Service Committee chairman; New York Rep. Gary Ackerman, the Foreign Affairs Middle East and South Asia subcommittee; and Florida Rep. Robert Wexler, a close Obama ally and chairman of the Foreign Affairs subcommittee on Europe.

"We must use the time available to us to begin engagement and to convince the Iranians of our seriousness of purpose," the letter said. "Otherwise, we will face far more difficult decisions in the future."

WASHINGTON (JTA) -- The U.S. defense secretary said economic sanctions would be more successful than diplomacy in dealing with Iran.

"I think frankly from my perspective, the opportunity for success is probably more in economic sanctions in both places than it is in diplomacy," said Robert Gates on the television program "Fox News Sunday," referring to both Iran and North Korea. "Diplomacy -- perhaps if there is enough economic pressure placed on Iran -- diplomacy can provide them an open door through which they can walk if they choose to change their policies, and so I think the two go hand in hand. But I think what gets them to the table is economic sanctions."

Gates' remarks came a little more than a week after President Obama launched an effort to diplomatically engage Iran, sending a videotaped message to the Iranian people.

The defense secretary also said on the program that Iran has "enough low-enriched uranium" to give it the capacity to make a weapon "should they enrich it more highly." But he said the United States does not believe that Iran has the capability yet.

Monday, March 30, 2009

After the recent events of Iran Blocks Facebook, Youtube and 5 Million Other Websites and the recent death of the Iranian blogger Omidreza Mirsayafi whilst in custody.Recently I read about the fact that Iran had 'allowed' some losening of its barrier against the internet, re: Why Did Iran Unblock Facebook?.There was a fair bit of discourse about this action, call me cynical but I simply saw it as a prudent move in allowing the population of Iran to actively 'blog' for Iran and 'advocate' for Iranian interests,(Read attack Israel). I think we've all seen just how effective the islamic backlash has been in '(mis)reporting' events concerning Israel.Well now that Iran has 'freed' access to the internet, whats next? Simple threaten the death penalty to any blogger not towing the party line..(yay human rights in Iran..)

Martin Livens writing for the Times discusses the G20 meeting summit this week and the pressing issue of a possible Israeli response to the rumoured Iranian pursuit of a Nuclear weapon.In "Us tries to defuse a ticking timebomb" Martin Livens puts forward just how complex the issue is, read his analysis here.

"All eyes will be on Barack Obama at the G20 summit this week. Among the great and good, the dull and dreary, in London’s Docklands he will be the only superstar. But the young president knows that what is decided inside a gleaming tower block in Tel Aviv will have more bearing on whether his presidency is accounted a success or failure than this talking shop.

High in the defence ministry building Major-General Amos Gilad points to a photograph on his wall of three Israeli F-15 jets flying over the site of Auschwitz. “I put it here to remind us of what happened and what may happen,” says the old fire-eater. The press claims he has been the real leader of the state for the past six months while the politicians have been out wooing the voters."

Saturday, March 28, 2009

TEHRAN, Mar 27, 2009 (UPI via comtex) - The presidents of Iran and Syria say the world is tilting in favor of Muslim nations and that Israel will soon be on the losing side of the balance of power.

Both leaders maintained Israel was on the decline, as were its allies, while Iran and Syria remained bastions of strength in the Middle East. Kuwait's KUNA news service reported Friday that Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Bashar al-Assad of Syria spoke by phone Thursday and agreed that current world events were strengthening regional alliances and that nations should take advantage of new opportunities.

The Iranian Islamic Republic News Agency quoted Ahmadinejad saying, "The strong camp of the friendly countries like Iran and Syria is going to be triumphant."

The Pentagon confirmed on March 16 that the U.S. military shot down one of Iran's unarmed drone planes in Iraqi airspace in February. There were no casualties.

Drones are being used for an increasing number of missile and surveillance missions. In December, Iran launched a new generation of "spy drones," which can take real-time surveillance over enemy terrain. Some have a range of 2,000 kilometers, an Iranian air force officer told the press last month.

"The Washington Times" noted in an editorial that Iranian planes can now "soar over every U.S. military installation, diplomatic mission, or country of interest in the Middle East,"

Friday, March 27, 2009

Ted Belman from Israpundit writing for Global Politician puts forward the idea that Israel doesnt have a 'good choice' when it comes to finding a solution to the looming nuclear proliferation of Iran. In his article Take Your Poison, Israel Israel is confronted with some not so desirable alternatives.

"The United States has two primary worries when it comes to Iran: its aggressive support for terrorism and its relentless pursuit of a suspected nuclear weapons program. Given these concerns, the United States has for years tried to persuade Iran, through both diplomatic and semi-punitive measures, to abandon both and to comply with a multitude of United Nations Security Council resolutions relating to Iran’s behaviour. Thus far, nothing has worked. "

Friday, March 20, 2009

"Iran's defence minister made a day-long official visit to Moscow on 16 February to press again for the sale of the S-300 surface-to-air missile system to Tehran to go forward, amid a restructuring of the Iranian military aimed at strengthening air defence capabilities..."

Tuesday, March 3, 2009

"Experts at the nonpartisan Arms Control Association (ACA) urged senior U.S. officials and the media to exhibit greater care to accurately state what is known about Iran's nuclear capabilities. The experts highlighted the confusion created over the weekend by inaccurate portrayals of the type of nuclear material Iran has produced which suggested that Tehran was closer to a nuclear weapon than public U.S. intelligence and International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) reports indicate."

Israel approached the White House in early 2008 with three requests for an attack on Iran’s main nuclear complex, said New York Times reporter David Sanger. His article appears in the newspaper on Sunday.

According to Sanger, Israel wanted specialized bunker-busting bombs, equipment to help refuel planes making flights into Iran and permission to fly over Iraq to reach the major nuclear complex at Natanz, the site of Iran’s only known uranium enrichment plant.

The White House “deflected” the first two requests and denied the last, Sanger said.

“They feared that if it appeared that the United States had helped Israel strike Iran, using Iraqi airspace, that the result in Iraq could be the expulsion of the American troops (from Iraq),” he said.read more..From : CNN Report: U.S. rejected Israeli plea to attack Iran